jdw

"Foldable" sounds neat in concept, and rumors tend to make logical sense in light of the fact foldable tech has been on the market for a while now.  But I can't help but see this more as a "me too" move than anything else.  Foldability would likely increase the cost of the MacBook Pro. Any creases, however slight, would be noticed by Apple product fans and make it less "stunning."  A foldable display would also likely make the notebook less durable, and therefore give it the potential to be another tech repeat of the butterfly keyboard fiasco.  

I still remember vividly how many people in this very forum sang praises from the highest hill about the butterfly keyboard, and even bashed me when I said I didn't like it and wanted Apple to return to better keyboard tech. Then Apple ditched that "innovative, new and here-to-stay" butterfly keyboard and went back to older but better tech.  Now everyone chastises it, and its fans tend to stay in silence as a result.  

I agree Apple needs to innovate, but foldable tech carries a lot of big risks for the company.

AppleInsider said:

We've yet to hear the ViewFinity S9's integrated speakers, microphone quality, or see the front-facing camera quality. We also haven't kicked the tires on how it functions in-home with daily use. The lack of a price tag also makes assessing the monitor more difficult. All we actually know so far is that Samsung will be offering Mac users another option to pick between. 

Without that important info, the article is rather worthless, and I say this as an AppleInsider article fan.  Would have been best to wait until a more detailed and meaningful comparison could be released.

I read all the comments thus far, and the only one that sounds somewhat reasonable is that from Stimpy.  The rest are all negative, bashing change, and defending the status quo.  We've got comments that go as far as say that crushing old computers isn't all that dangerous to health, with other comments trying to call in the blood sucking lawyers, and then other comments which talk about the untrustworthiness of right to repair advocates.  Someone even defended democracy in what I assume to be the USA by saying we can at least be thankful we have elected officials who implement "our values," forgetting that America is divided 50-50, and that a house divided cannot stand.  All the while, not a single person here is trying to propose a way to improve things.  Not a single one.  Everyone complains and screams "Safety!" and "Security!" and "Lawyers!", and nobody really cares, and nothing improves as a result.

Bravo.

There needs to be a way for sensitive data to be reasonably and securely erased in such a way that the electronics of a given device can later be repurposed rather than destroyed.  Any argument that defends the status quo of "destruction is the only safe method" is not a sustainable solution and therefore requires a rethink.  That's why I appreciate stories like this because it challenges us to rethink what we are doing now and asks us to think about a better way.  Anyone thinking that crushing computers is a better way or the only way isn't thinking hard enough.  And with all the self-praising advertising that Apple does about sustainability, solar panels, recycled materials, use of less toxic materials, etc., it behoves that same Apple to think further about how to keep its beloved machines in operation longer, even if that means some people may opt for an older Mac, now and then, rather than a new. 

I can only be thankful that this security and recycling madness didn't happen in the distant past.  As a result, I can thoroughly enjoy vintage 1980's and 1990's Macs today.  Computing history from that era is preserved.  Toying with an SE/30 or Color Classic may not be completely practical, but it is a fun hobby and there's an active community built around mods and upgrades.  We still have some very old hard drives, such as the GCC HyperDrive, still in use today because folks back in the day didn't put a drill through every one out of data theft fears.  And hobbyists today aren't going around sharing stolen data either, even though there is an abundance of old data still residing on ancient drives housed in machines sold at yard sales for low prices.

fastasleep said:

entropys said:

The concern here is the same as CSAM scanning on the iPhone. It's more than a matter of personal privacy. It's a concern centered on the possibility that an error could result in a law abiding person being reported to law enforcement, which cares more about filling quotas and busting so-called bad guys than anything else.  Having an accused person's time wasted, or worse, being arrested for something they didn't do only because a computer secretly misread a file on their computer is something no citizen of any nation should stand for.  

It was always more than that. The concern was that child abuse was a smoke screen for a broader purpose, eg identifying people that did not agree with an authoritarian government by what pictures they were looking at.

Which was also a horseshit argument. If a hostile government wanted to force Apple to install nefarious software features, why would they need this feature as a smokescreen? And would you expect Apple to comply with something like that?

Why so hostile toward me, and so defensive of file scanning?  ("Horseshit" is a word that indicates hostility toward me, and I do not appreciate it at all.)

While forced local scanning on a Mac by government order is a frightful 1984-style nightmare for all citizens (law abiding or not), the upside is that Little Snitch would likely work to block any outgoing transfers.

The concern here is the same as CSAM scanning on the iPhone. It's more than a matter of personal privacy. It's a concern centered on the possibility that an error could result in a law abiding person being reported to law enforcement, which cares more about filling quotas and busting so-called bad guys than anything else.  Having an accused person's time wasted, or worse, being arrested for something they didn't do only because a computer secretly misread a file on their computer is something no citizen of any nation should stand for.  

So how do law enforcers deal with law breakers?  How they always have — which doesn't include privacy invasions like file scanning without a search warrant.  It may not be the ideal approach in light of the tech we have today, but it's the only approach to protect citizen from unlawful search and seizure.